Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

I know but this is a discussion, I thought it would be an interesting line of discussion we haven't actually spoken about in this topic...

The "What about the children and their poor impressionable minds?"

But weird said it better and I'll quote him to prevent "previous page amnesia"

But it is still "Moral outrage," and giving it weight of law is insane. That way leads to madness, and guarantees the creation of an oppressed demographic.

The alternative is lots of "inconvenienced" or "Offended" demographics, who don't get 100% their way, having to tough it out together.

I think the latter is the better solution to employ, since this is a system-wide problem.

This is, again, "Things that make me feel squicky" VS "Things that should be illegal."
Explaining to little suzy why the woman with the beard is in the stall next to her? Squicky.
Forbidding the early stage transgender person from using their mentally gender appropriate bathroom, and trying some bullshit segregation? Should be illegal. (It directly harms people)

The "It would confuse my poor impressionable child, who I want to pretend will never, ever be exposed to the moral horrors of this perverted modern life, shattering the wholesome, godly worldview illusion I have worked so hard to conjure up!" is NOT justification for segregation, which is EXACTLY what a "third bathroom" would be.

[Truean]

That's odd, nobody thinks about the gay or transgender kids and how it harms them to be called a freak.... We don't like talking about kids that way but yes there are kids who are gay, or transgender.

Or, this happens when you accept them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/14/jazz-jennings-clean-clear_n_6864236.html

All those laws we sited say she should use the men's room no matter how she looks and is now. Wow. That's some bullshit.

[wierd]

I don't think there is intentional bias there; More that heterosexuality is the predominant orientation, with others constituting some 10% collectively. (all together)

My own orientation is Asexual. I use the men's room. I dont care if gay men use the mens room. I wouldnt care if a female->male transgendered person used the men's room. 

There's a reasonably utilitarian reason to have seperate mens and women's rooms; Men and women have different plumbing, and what is most convenient for each can be selectively supplied appropriately. There being 2 bathrooms is convenient for both. There is no compelling utilitarian reason for a third bathroom, unless we had a tri-gendered species with a 3rd kind of plumbing that had different needs.

We don't have that, so there is no need for a 3rd bathroom.  All the reasons for a 3rd bathroom stem from "But it makes me feel all squicky! WHAAA!!"

Laws should not come out of "But it makes me feel all squicky!!".  I have already invested a TLDR post on why that is.

[Neonivek]

Some places have a "third bathroom" but they tend to be handicapped toilets and incredibly rarely a family bathroom for changing babies and escorting young children to the toilets.

[wierd]

And again, that's for a utilitarian reason.  The facilities in the other 2 are not up to the specialized needs.

There is no specialized need that must be met for a transgender.

The "handicapped/family" bathroom is mostly a cost savings utilitarian fixture. The alternative is to put a handicapped accessible stall, and a baby changing station in EVERY bathroom.  A locality may elect to have 2 bathrooms, with redundancy, OR they may elect to have 3 bathrooms, with the handicapped stall and baby changing station in the third.  They can reduce the amount of plumbing they have to buy/maintain, and they can give some increased comfort to their patrons in the process.

Putting people who are gender associatively different into a bathroom for the sole purpose of making people with issues about squickiness "feel better", and making them feel less wanted, abnormal, or feel like unnecessary attention is being given to their gender identity?  That's just straight up bullshit.

[Frumple]

I'd give some weight to the different plumbing thing... except when was the last time you saw a urinal in a private bathroom? It's... kinda' obvious we don't really need them, and could get by perfectly well with just stalls.

[wierd]

Female bathrooms also feature tampon disposals, and various other fixtures catering to female needs.

[Neonivek]

Not that a optional transgendered bathroom is a bad idea though.

A sort of transitional bathroom for those who need it.

[wierd]

No, sociologically, it IS a bad thing.

It gives credibility to the claims that not feeling squicky is just cause for segregation, and it demeans the transgendered.

The correct answer is to tell the "Moral outrage" types to "suck it up, sunshine."

[Neonivek]

It is a purely optional toilet that you don't have to use... and you can use any toilet anyway.

Same reasoning behind the private schools that only host only specific kinds of people.

As in if you are MTF you can use the transgendered toilet until your comfortable going to the female toilets.

[wierd]

The problem with the "Optional toilet" in this case, is that the "Moral outrage" types will treat it as a "Mandatory toilet".

This is 100% counter to the idea of integration.  It is incredibly destructive to a person's psyche to be told "OMG! What the fuck!? Go use YOUR bathroom, for god's sake!"--- When they ARE using the correct bathroom.

Transgendered people are not people with a 3rd gender. Transgendered people are people who have reassigned their physical gender to match their mental gender.  As far as they are concerned, they are MALE or FEMALE.  Not "Trans".

[Neonivek]

We already officially treat someone transgendered as someone with a different sexuality.

Given that you are either Gay, Lesbian, Bi, or Transgendered. (And no, I am not blaming LGBT... I done research and the biggest barrier to finding information on the sexuality of transgendered people... is that "Gay" and "Transgendered" were considered to be different sexualities)

So that is nothing new. We treat them as the fourth sexuality... and if we are using the spectrum we treat them like the extra line.

[LordBucket]

This no quoting thing you have going is actually a good metaphor for this entire conversation. There's a standard thing that everybody else does and everybody else is comfortable with, but for reasons that are unclear you demand special treatment that is inconvenient. A few posts ago somebody pointed it out so I tried to accommodate you, but because I, accustomed to treating you like everybody else treats everybody else...neglected to accommodate your special needs, so you're getting angry at me for it.

Consider that venting anger at people who are trying to accommodate you does not encourage sympathy to your cause. I came into this agreeing with your conclusion and yet you're nevertheless yelling at me in bold. So I will step out of the conversation, and I will simply remember it as a tone-setter for the next conversation I have with a member of your particular minority group.

[Urist Arrhenius]

Regardless of your position, the way you just exited this conversation is by promising to stereotype...

[Rolan7]

This is a hard thread to follow, sometimes it's hard to tell what people are even disagreeing about.

The best solution is to just make all the bathrooms unisex.
Adding third bathrooms would be expensive and wouldn't solve anything.
Letting FtMs and MtFs go in the bathroom of their gender doesn't work, either, unless you live in a magical place where everyone passes perfectly.  Requiring people to completely hide their physical sex is unreasonable when they just want to pee.

With unisex bathrooms, there's no outcry over seeing what looks like a man in the women's bathroom, because there is no women's bathroom.  I don't see how segregated bathrooms help protect anybody at all...  Sexual predators (or violent transphobes) don't care about signs.  And if it's just about peeing in the same room with someone who's attracted to your gender, well...  There's this common thing called "homosexuality".  Segregating bathrooms does nothing about that.

So in the short term it shouldn't be illegal to use either bathroom, and in the long term they should be labelled unisex.

It's not a difficult problem...  Unlike locker rooms, which are a much tougher issue.  Those I understand segregating based on genitalia, for lack of a better solution.

This no quoting thing you have going is actually a good metaphor for this entire conversation. There's a standard thing that everybody else does and everybody else is comfortable with, but for reasons that are unclear you demand special treatment that is inconvenient. A few posts ago somebody pointed it out so I tried to accommodate you, but because I, accustomed to treating you like everybody else treats everybody else...neglected to accommodate your special needs, so you're getting angry at me for it.

I really wish she's make the "Please don't quote me" a hyperlink to one of the times she's explained it.  I'm a bit sore over getting ganged up on after I complied and also asked why.  It's a bit of a derail magnet, and making the demand without offering any explanation doesn't look so good.